Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
The AT dismissed the appeal challenging the provisional attachment of 20 immovable properties under the PML Act, concluding the appellant operated a Ponzi scheme through multiple entities, initially paying returns from new investors' funds before collapsing. The tribunal rejected the appellant's contention that incarceration precluded the risk of property dissipation, noting the appellant's ability to act via associates or power of attorney to frustrate proceedings. The attachment was upheld as an intermediate measure to preserve the properties for potential confiscation upon conviction, without affecting possession unless exceptional circumstances arise. The AT found no error in the Adjudicating Authority's confirmation of the attachment order, thereby affirming the restraint on the properties pending trial.
The AT dismissed the appeal challenging the provisional attachment of 20 immovable properties under the PML Act, concluding the appellant operated a Ponzi scheme through multiple entities, initially paying returns from new investors' funds before collapsing. The tribunal rejected the appellant's contention that incarceration precluded the risk of property dissipation, noting the appellant's ability to act via associates or power of attorney to frustrate proceedings. The attachment was upheld as an intermediate measure to preserve the properties for potential confiscation upon conviction, without affecting possession unless exceptional circumstances arise. The AT found no error in the Adjudicating Authority's confirmation of the attachment order, thereby affirming the restraint on the properties pending trial.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.